Any C and/or GTK programmers(LINUX)???

Post Reply New Topic

Anyone here proficient in either C or GTK for the *Nix platform that would want to develop an uncompression GUI program for Linux? The GUI would be for command line tools like unecm, unrar, etc.

If your not to good to work with me that is. Being as everyone here is on their high horse.

Last edited by amboxer21 on 09 Sep 2012, 9:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I know this doesn't address your request, but why restrict yourself to *NIX, and use GTK as opposed to Qt?

Why a GUI for multiple command line tools?

Well GTK is for C programmers. Whereas QT is for Python and and C++. Secondly, I don't know how to work with QT. Windows has plenty of GUI's for these tools. Its *Nix that's lacking them!

Why a GUI for "multiple" GUI tools? Well why make 5 different GUI's?

GTK feels so smooth! So easy to use! The only issue I have is that it takes a ton of code to write a GUI. IMO, some of it seems unnecessary!

I am learning Java very slowly ATM, because I am occupied with quite a few other things but I had a look at GUI programming with Java and it looks very straight forward with few lines of code compared to GTK.

I would imaging Java GUI's are portable no matter the platform. As long as the OS java dependencies are satisfied.

i'm not too good to work with you, so long as you're not too good to work with me. i'm very busy too with lots of stuff, especially since i'm moving house to the city in two weeks. but my switch to linux is on track for the end of this week, since i got done the one little thing i had to do with it today (burn a gparted disc). then maybe next week i can do something with my new linux, like learn gtk, or at least make a plan to learn it after i've moved, or follow what you've learnt so far with it, but i won't have the whole week. i've already decided to put off learning assembly until after i move. my priority right now is to get everything packed to move by the end of next week, and i haven't done today's packing task yet, and it's past midnight! i guess i'd better get off the interwebz now and get to it. it should be fun though, because it's toys, all things toys, but not all the toys, just enough to get them all under control.

Java GUIs using the built in API with nothing on top look crusty to me on desktop OSes. Like there's something wrong with it. The interpreter should just rely on OS widgets but it chooses to draw everything, and that's a problem. That it draws uglier than the OS widgets is worse.

Windows doesn't come with a Java interpreter and these days most Windows users don't seem to have one installed. I would not consider Java a portability solution.

With all due respect, I don't think it makes a lot of sense to use a non-OO language to do a GUI. A GUI pretty much *is* a set of objects. GUI libraries written in C need to emulate OO, which is uglier than just using C++.

Your explanation of why you would want to restrict portability doesn't hold a lot of water. Portability > Nonportability. Granted, GTK exists on Windows, but their implementation is a joke. I understand you haven't used the Qt API before, but that's never stopped me.

I am use Windows 7 to download and burn playstation games and it came with Java installed. The only reason, I was considering using Java instead was because of a few reasons. One, I am learning the language anyway. I have an app i want to write for my smart phone. A scaled down concept some MIT students did for thier laptops.

Two, it looks so much smoother than GTK!



For me I feel it does! I started off with the C language a few years ago and Never touched a OO language besides a bit of Python. Never stuck with it for some reason. I think GTK feels so smooth because of this, because I have never used an OO language before.

I for one, think that C looks so much better than C++! That crap is ulgy! GTK still looks the same as plain C, only with wrappers and tons of functions to pass args. If anything, it looks much better than plain C! Even better than C++, IMO.

Maybe I should have explained myself a bit better! I am not trying to restrict portability. I am just unwilling to take the extra step to make it windows-able(couldn't think of a word). Also, I have no intentions or desire to learn to develop on the Windows platform! I use windows to load music on my iTouch and burn games for my PS2. I do sincerly loathe Microsoft! I do have to give it to them for it's ease of use though. They are trying to monopolize the industry and lock out *Nix. What a bunch of as*holes!! I don't respect them... at all! Not one bit!

Secondly, I have no intentions of learning C++. Ok, this is going to sound silly but I am deeply in love with the C language!! I would feel like I am betraying the C language if I were ever to use C++. Honestly though, if I were to learn OO if I weren't learning Java now, I would learn python! Such a powerful language! Great for almost everthing!

Finally, I don't have a job and I am on disability. It's not like I am in the software field and am obligated to learn C++ or QT. I love C and GTK! Why learn another language from scrath and its GUI toolkit, when I am completely comfortable and competent with those 2? I know GTK exists on Windows and isn't fully supported. No idea why. Maybe you can clear it up for me?!

I really hope I didn't sound ignorant. If i did let me know please!

I wonder if you will change your mind when the complexity of your apps increases.

I like the C language as much as you do, but OO is practically a necessity. GTK's OO hacks are specific to GTK. C++ is an entire language whose objects are compatible with each other at the language level.

I understand this is your thing though and as it's not for money you don't answer to anyone.

GTK sucks on Windows in a large part because it was designed from the ground up in a way that was willfully and deliberately ignorant of Windows, because its authors don't like Windows. It assumes the presence of full POSIX and an X server. Providing those things on Windows requires some gross hackery. I don't blame them for their issues with Windows, especially as of the time GTK was first conceived, but I don't think they did themselves any favors.

Their widgets also don't match the OS widgets, same issue as Java. I think Qt's widgets are custom drawn like GTK and Java, but at least they match the OS. Qt is mostly seamless.

I wonder how easy writing a Chat GUI would be in an OO language like C++ or Python with QT? With GTK it is a pain in the ass! I am having so much trouble with the send button callback.


What do you think about python and its GUI toolkits? Both PyQt and PyGTK. Not sure as to how portable Python is. I know C++ is portable and present on both *Nix and Windows.




Makes sense. It kind of seems like you have something against GTK though Lol Like your hating on it.


Yeah, your definitely a GTK hater! QT fans will do that!

Forget the uncompression GUI project I guess, I'm going to go back to learning Java.

Like I said any GUI program will ultimately benefit from OO. It sounds like you might already be experiencing this.

I'm not really much of a Python programmer, so I can't speak from experience with any of their GUI toolkits. I would naturally be opposed to PyGTK simply because it's GTK. I'm not just anti-GTK, I think it's just plain *out* as a candidate for commercial development, at least as far as I am concerned. Things need to be seamless and portable for me, and they cannot be both with GTK. It's that simple. This is before I even get into their API, which I don't like but would use if there were a driving reason to. I am not a "Qt fan", other than their API provides seamless operation which I would consider a design requirement. If Qt weren't available and I needed to develop a GUI application, my second choice would likely be to write my own abstraction layer, or possibly wxWidgets which I haven't looked at since 1998 when it was called wxWindows.

The other issue with Python is that it's an interpreted language for which an interpreter isn't packaged with Windows installations. Therefore, either you have to distribute one or the user has to get one. Making things worse, their distribution is rather large and includes a large number of small files.